That's the key to the no-op idea. The no-op character could not ever be
assumed to survive interchange with another process. It'd be canonically
equivalent to the absence of character. It could be added or removed at any
position by a Unicode-conformant process. A program could wipe all the
no-ops
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:56:11 +
Shawn Steele via Unicode wrote:
> Assuming you were using any of those characters as "markup", how
> would you know when they were intentionally in the string and not
> part of your marking system?
If they're conveying an invisible message, one would have to
I assure you, it wasn't very interesting. :-) Headache-y, more like. The
diacritic thing was completely inapplicable anyway, as all our text was
plain English. I really don't want to get into what the thing was, because
it sounds stupider the more I try to explain it. But it got the wheels
Combining Grapheme Joiner (U+034F) is probably what you want as it is default
ignorable and keeps the acute on top of the E. However it nay break languages
with di- and trigraphs or complex diacritics.
Best regards
Marius
> Gesendet: Samstag, 22. Juni 2019 um 02:14 Uhr
> Von: "Sławomir
Assuming you were using any of those characters as "markup", how would you know
when they were intentionally in the string and not part of your marking system?
-Original Message-
From: Unicode On Behalf Of Richard Wordingham via
Unicode
Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2019 4:17 PM
To:
+ the list. For some reason the list's reply header is confusing.
From: Shawn Steele
Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2019 4:55 PM
To: Sławomir Osipiuk
Subject: RE: Unicode "no-op" Character?
The original comment about putting it between the base character and the
combining diacritic seems peculiar.
On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 17:50:49 -0400
Sławomir Osipiuk via Unicode wrote:
> If faced with the same problem today, I’d
> probably just go with U+FEFF (really only need a single char, not a
> whole delimited substring) or a different C0 control (maybe SI/LS0)
> and clean up the string if it needs to
Indeed. There are plenty of control characters that seem useful, but they
really aren’t, due to lack of support from common software. Unicode is
deliberately silent about most of them, which is fair, but not always
convenient. If faced with the same problem today, I’d probably just go with
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 2:04 PM Sławomir Osipiuk via Unicode <
unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> I see there is no such character, which I pretty much expected after
> Google didn’t help.
>
>
>
> The original problem I had was solved long ago but the recent article
> about watermarking reminded me of
I see there is no such character, which I pretty much expected after Google
didn't help.
The original problem I had was solved long ago but the recent article about
watermarking reminded me of it, and my question was mostly out of curiosity.
The task wasn't, strictly speaking, about "padding",
Sławomir Osipiuk wrote:
> Does Unicode include a character that does nothing at all? I'm talking
> about something that can be used for padding data without affecting
> interpretation of other characters, including combining chars and
> ligatures.
I join Shawn Steele in wondering what your "data
Perhaps a codepoint from a private use area and another processing step to
add/ remove them would work for you?
On Sat, Jun 22, 2019, 1:39 AM Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
wrote:
> There nothing like what you are describing. Examples:
>
>1. Display — There are a few of the Default Ignorables
There nothing like what you are describing. Examples:
1. Display — There are a few of the Default Ignorables that are always
treated as invisible, and have little effect on other characters. However,
even those will generally interfere with the display of sequences (be
between 'q' and
Op zaterdag 22 juni 2019 02:14 schreef Sławomir Osipiuk via Unicode:
Does Unicode include a character that does nothing at all? I'm
talking about something that can be used for padding data without
affecting interpretation of other characters, including combining
chars and ligatures. I.e. a
14 matches
Mail list logo
